Digital vs real artifact,

The digital was actually very representable compared to what I thought it would be. Especially since most digitizing is done by just taking pictures of a page. I expected the quality to be less. The only reason why I didn’t like the digital version is because it took away the impact of the magazine. Seeing it in person made the magazine so much more interesting. To know that your are seeing and reading something that is almost a hundred years old and that has been read by our ancestors is exciting. The age and discolartion of the artifact made it more engaging and leaving you wanting to know more about it. Versus reading it on the internet you don’t get the ancient feel of the magazine its just reading on a screen like any other website. Plus most people don’t read the copyright page and table of contents if you were to hold this up to any other pdf file it would have no difference. I do support digitizing things because eventually that book will dissipate into nothing. Being a reader though, I personally like the book vs the digital version it made way more impact on me and made me go back to the digital version to read more of the stories and see how I could relate to my ancestors of that time period.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s